Actually, the above is not exactly correct. Though the biggest settings for D&D are high fantasy: Forgotten realms and Greyhawk chief among them, there are different kinds of settings covering various genres.

Spelljammer does sci-fiDark sun does Post ApocalypticDragonlance is a hybrid setting Grey wind is a modern/fantasy setting.

All of these are D&D, so you wouldn't need to learn a new setting, though they all have some unique elements to them.

The list goes on. There's a system out there for just about any popular setting you can think of.

And probably one or more for many settings that you haven't even considered... Luckily, there's also systems that can do more than one kind of settings (usually called "universal" for obvious reasons). It's just that D&D ain't one of those.

Just like Muse said, I see you have GMs already, and I'm not new to D&D in any way, shape or form, so I'm not going to add much. I'll admit that I was kinda surpised the GMs didn't elect to use one of the free D&D-derived games, because they're free and have simpler rules.But in the end, that's just my approach - what matters is that the GM(s) should be happy with the rules !

All this information is accurate. However, we do have people that are currently looking for information regarding 5e DND. While in previous editions there were various other settings... Ravenloft somehow being missed, for Wizards of the Coast sanctioned material, Faerun is the primarily realm of focus. We could toss out various other settings and systems like White Wolf's Vampire the Masquerade, but that can get overwhelming and push off the basic request to learn 5e DND.

I suggested Horde of the Dragon Queen as it is a preset campaign that I own the book for, which was the first pre-set module created for 5e.

Never worry about being new to a system. We were all new at one point in time.

I didn't get it that the request was for learning the latest edition, necessarily. If anything, Pathfinder has been proposed as an option, and that's an edition and a half in the past, with many OSR games being newer than that !

If the request was indeed for D&D 5e, you'd have my apologies for missing that detail, and you should disregard my suggestion to use any Old-School Renaissance games !

That could be my oversight and for that I am sorry. But at that point, we have a few people who are looking to learn. We have a few systems that can be learned, but they are different. For the newer group, what system are you looking to learn. DND, there are numerous editions, with the most recent being 5th edition. Older editions like 3.0/3.5 are still played, but they are different. Systems like Vampire the Masquerade are played, but they are a drastically different system from DND. The system I am offering to teach specifically would be 5e DND, which is the most current form of Dungeons and Dragons. That is what I am willing to DM for. If players are looking to play other system instead, there are DMs who are putting their name into the hat for those systems it seems.

I do have a question that may benefit those of us who find we like the system: What are ALL of the DnD types used on Elliquiy and are there just minor differences or are the differences major to what we will be working with? If minor, could you explain the differences?

DND 2.0 is closer to similarity to original DND... I don't see those used on the site ever. If they are, I haven't seen a group. They are significantly different.

Pathfinder and DND 3.0/3.5 are similar, but different. DND 5.0 is significantly different from those editions. Both of these systems are classified as a d20 system, using a variety of dice for different rolls.

Vampire the Masquerade is a significantly different system and is classified as a d10 system, which only uses d10s to determine successes or failures.

Personally, I see more people that use 5.0 on the site as it is considered the current DND system supported by Wizards of the Coast, the current owners for Dungeons and Dragons. However, so people do enjoy the older systems.

It helps that 5E is much more streamlined and less clunky in some respects when it comes to rules and what have you compared to older systems. Very few people I've seen ever play D&D 4th Edition for that reason. It's still playable, but I wouldn't recommend it, especially for a first time game. As for me, I've actually seen a couple of awesome Vampire the Masquerade games on here I'd have loved to join, but I didn't because I had no clue how to do anything with the system, so I didn't even try. Still, for this, I'd rather just stick with 5th Edition for D&D, thanks. And yes, story much more over smut thank you.

I do have a question that may benefit those of us who find we like the system: What are ALL of the DnD types used on Elliquiy and are there just minor differences or are the differences major to what we will be working with? If minor, could you explain the differences?

You sent us straight over the deep end, Dragongoddess....

OK, let me put it simply: ALL editions of ALL games are played by someone, somewhere. I remember on another forum a guy said he wrote some minimalist rules as a joke, never playtested them, and didn't expect anyone to play them - ever. They just sat on his website.That is, until he received an e-mail from a Japanese guy who said their group had just concluded a year-long campaign using his system, and they wanted to continue. But before committing, the unnamed Japanese GM wanted to know, is the author working on the next edition ?

If we were to focus just on D&D editions, here's a simple breakdown. Note I said "simple", not "short" !You can skip it safely, though. No, really.

Long-ish Breakdown

OD&D is the first D&D edition, and the first RPG published, in 1974 IIRC (I wasn't born yet, either way). It's actually quite elegant in its simplicity, as long as you're fine with more abstract things - for example, all weapons do the same damage (1d6). Reasoning: all weapons have a chance to kill you. The GM can give you a bonus for having the better weapon, of course...It's still being played, and probably will be for as long as there are RPGs.

The next few editions (B/X, BECMI, Mentzer, AD&D, and so on up until AD&D2e) get less and less complex, on the price being: more rules. I lump them together, because people often mixed and matched them, in practice (or so I've been told - I've only seen the books for one of those). In reality, you can even mix them with OD&D - it's not like there's a definite line, and the "engine" is robust enough to take it.

All of the above have "clones" nowadays. Some clones are notable for adding and discarding some elements, achieving different effects. Some of my favourites make the game better suited to Swords and Sorcery games in the style of Conan, Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, Red Sonja, and the like (DCC RPG, Crypts and Things, and arguably, Low Fantasy RPG). Others make it more suited for Dark Fantasy, in the style of Elric, Dragon Age, and their ilk (Crimson Blades, for example). A game like Backswords and Bucklers gives you the opportunity to pubcrawl London in the age of the Tudors. The Adventurer, Conqueror, King System (ACKS) gives you the opportunity to follow Conan's path, starting as an adventurer, and carving out your domain, then ruling it...hopefully wisely.Others...well, just give you more material to play with, being in essence the author's houserules.Collectively, the "not quite clones" are known as the OSR (Old School Renaissance). If you sense me being biased towards those, that's true! I just find them most fun. That's probably due to the GMing ethos, though, which says "if you can think of something, you can always try it" (though learning magic as a warrior is out, for most games).

Then we get to Third Edition (often abbreviated to "3.5").It's a complete re-boot, you can't mix material published for it with material for the previous editions (well, you can - but it's like adapting material from a different game). It's also got orders of magnitude more rules. Some critics, me included, claim that it takes some very hard jumping through hoops to make sure the non-magical classes remain useful. Of course, that might be a feature for some.The edition is most notable for giving much more options to mix and match when building your character - special abilities of different classes, special abilities "everyone can take", magic items, spells, spell-like effects, and so on. Those combine in interesting ways, and some people outright state that making an optimized character is a major part of the fun. Want a barbarian wizard who resorts to spells when his barbarian rage isn't enough? Sure, you can do that. (I think it's not really optimized, but it's a combo that's outright impossible in many previous editions).You'll also hear about Pathfinder. Everything that's true for 3.5 is true for PF as well, since it's based on 3.5 to begin with, just like the OSR games are based on the earlier editions. I prefer other games based on 3.5, like Fantasy Craft.

There's Fourth Edition: Really codified, rather good for tactical combat with grid and miniatures. It's also the least popular on forums, because the grid and miniatures are hard for forum games - and because a fight usually lasts at least 45 minutes in real time. I guess that's too long for forum games?That's the one I have the least experience with - though it makes martial classes mostly equal to magical ones.If I wanted to play something like it, but lighter, though I'd rather use 13th Age (because it relies less on grids). 4e is also, basically, a separate game from all previous editions - convert at your own risk.

And the current Fifth edition (5e) is streamlined, and plays like a hybrid of 3.5 and 4e with some elements thrown in from earlier editions - but most of it is from the previous two.Also a separate game.

You must understand this, though: all editions of D&D and all games that aren't D&D, have advantages and disadvantages. There's no perfect game. There's only "perfect, or close to it" for a specific game, with a specific group!Some people like codified rules and knowing what the effect would be. Others prefer to improvise on the spot, and having the GM adjudicate. That, right there, is a major difference between, say, 3.5 and earlier games.The important part is knowing what you like...

And then you're going to play what the GM is willing to run, anyway . But you can at least try everything, and maybe look for a specific game next time.

Oh, and there are many, many other games out there. All possible genres are covered already, I believe. Some games are even multi-genre, like GURPS, BRP and arguably, Traveller.A major difference between D&D and most other games is, however, that usually, editions of a game are "mostly compatible". Different editions of D&D are different games that play differently, especially the most recent ones.Don't sweat it, trying to learn all of the above! If you find it fun, you'll learn in time. You can just Google a genre's name and "tabletop RPG" some time. You might be surprised what you could find under "wuxia tabletop rpg", for example ! Reviews are really helpful, and sometimes funny.

Everything pre-3rd edition D&D was a combat system. There was little to no concept in the industry yet about role playing v. roll playing and while that was certainly developing with story lines, plots, and extensive world building, the SYSTEM only supported it in the most basic way. For that reason, these versions are fossils.

3rd edition introduced some ideas for playing beyond the dungeon combat. Skills were the main feature, but also spells, abilities and items that provided more direct tools. 3.5 came out incredibly soon after 3.0 and just introduced some balancing and additional features without any substantial rules changes; because of the quick release and similarity, 3.0 isn't much of a thing.

4th edition was a turning point for the game. I haven't dealt with it much, but it's often described as the computer game version of D&D. Everybody gets special abilities, there's a huge focus on combat, lots of ways to reduce 'downtime' (game time spent healing, recovering spells or recharging abilities) and the skills system regressed. It was also made with the intention that players would use miniatures and a table top grid. Some people loved it, but it was a business disaster that brought D&D from THE role playing game which defined the genre to a secondary role, and eventually forced TSR to sell out to Wizards.

This is because, when TSR released 4th edition, they made the benevolent but disastrous decision to make 3.5 edition open source. The idea was to let the old version stick around as a quiant curiosity supported by a few hobbyists releasing free content. Instead, enter Paizo's Pathfinder system. Recognizing 4th edition's unpopularity, Paizo took the open source 3.5 ruleset, addressed several problems, added a huge amount of variation and content that provided excellent customization almost on par with a point based system, and took the risk of selling rule books that weren't copyrighted. It was a spectacular success and launched the company ahead of D&D. So the rules are all available online for free, other publishers can also produce content for it, and it's basically still the same system that has been the best selling RPG since 2000.

Recently, D&D released 5e which I don't really have anything to add for. As mentioned, it's a blend of 3.5 and 4, with some other stuff thrown in. It's not a flop, but IMO the old giant is still fumbling around a bit trying to figure out what type of game comes next.

Expand all you want, but you got the information wrong - including the facts.

Quote

Everything pre-3rd edition D&D was a combat system. There was little to no concept in the industry yet about role playing v. roll playing and while that was certainly developing with story lines, plots, and extensive world building, the SYSTEM only supported it in the most basic way. For that reason, these versions are fossils.

I guess that's why the Charisma stat is the only stat that got more than one paragraph of space, and the only one to have its own table associated ?It's just that the original players were also players of Diplomacy and didn't imagine that anyone might need rules for non-physical/non-magical actions.(Then again, they were also amazed that anyone would need pre-made adventures. I guess they didn't understand well all their customers ).

Quote

3rd edition introduced some ideas for playing beyond the dungeon combat. Skills were the main feature, but also spells, abilities and items that provided more direct tools. 3.5 came out incredibly soon after 3.0 and just introduced some balancing and additional features without any substantial rules changes; because of the quick release and similarity, 3.0 isn't much of a thing.

Skills existed in the previous edition already. And there was never a lack of spells and items.Feats are the main new element.

Quote

4th edition was a turning point for the game. I haven't dealt with it much, but it's often described as the computer game version of D&D. Everybody gets special abilities, there's a huge focus on combat, lots of ways to reduce 'downtime' (game time spent healing, recovering spells or recharging abilities) and the skills system regressed. It was also made with the intention that players would use miniatures and a table top grid. Some people loved it, but it was a business disaster that brought D&D from THE role playing game which defined the genre to a secondary role, and eventually forced TSR to sell out to Wizards.

Wizards had bought out TSR before producing THIRD edition! Fourth edition was theirs, too. As is Fifth.TSR sold out to WotC after Second Edition.At least get your dates right.

And D&D is still the most popular game. At some points, Pathfinder might have been close to its sales (no exact data was ever available). But then, arguably, Exalted and the Warhammer 40k RPGs were close, too - but no longer. Though I still prefer Exalted, but that's me.

Quote

This is because, when TSR released 4th edition, they made the benevolent but disastrous decision to make 3.5 edition open source. The idea was to let the old version stick around as a quiant curiosity supported by a few hobbyists releasing free content. Instead, enter Paizo's Pathfinder system. Recognizing 4th edition's unpopularity, Paizo took the open source 3.5 ruleset, addressed several problems, added a huge amount of variation and content that provided excellent customization almost on par with a point based system, and took the risk of selling rule books that weren't copyrighted. It was a spectacular success and launched the company ahead of D&D. So the rules are all available online for free, other publishers can also produce content for it, and it's basically still the same system that has been the best selling RPG since 2000.

All true, but that was WotC, not TSR.

Quote

Recently, D&D released 5e which I don't really have anything to add for. As mentioned, it's a blend of 3.5 and 4, with some other stuff thrown in. It's not a flop, but IMO the old giant is still fumbling around a bit trying to figure out what type of game comes next.

Arguably, all available data points to 5e sales overtaking PF sales again. Paizo's business model wasn't based on sales of their rules, however - they've always relied on selling their Adventure Paths, first and foremost. That's why they offer all the rules for free on the PFSRD site.

So as to not clutter up the post with debate, I'll put some not imediatly relevent items in spoiler text.

On E-BAdger's Statement

E-Badger, I respectfully contest your asertion that everything pre-3rd editon was a combat system. While the skill system was a much better streamlined mechanic for what older editons did with non-weapon proficiciens and theif skills, those things were clearly present in 2nd editon D&D. As a... There's a term for it, but someone who likes thier mechanics to model their character as closely as is reasonable--I honestly consider 3rd edition a step backwards in that it drasticly generalized character abilites. Examples? In second editon your fighter might have been a bastard sword specialsit who was also proficienceint wtih daggers, staves, and all forms fo crossbow. That fighter could aply his genreal combat savvy to any weapon with a good deal of skill, but nowhere near the skil he brought to bear with the weapons he'd specificly trained in.

In Third edition the same fighter was equaly proficient in all simple and martial weapons.

Likewise, your second edition fighter might have been a girl who worked in a coutnry inn growing up. She could know how to cook, how to stable a horse, and---thanks to the local priest of Denir--how to read and write her native languege and the history of her home nation.

The same character in second edtion was a professional barmaid, who was equaly skilled tending and training any animal, equaly aware of her own history and that of the nation on the other side of the planet, and could read adn write every languege she could spea (even if they used diferent alphabets.)

Ultimately, these are minor details, nad I got used to them. Almost 20 yeas later I still find the 3rd edtion presentation of religion and spirtualtiy in the Forgotten REalms vastly inferrior to 2nd editon. Faiths and Avatars, Demihuman Deities, and Powers and Pantheons presetned a beautiful blend of roll playing infomration and priest classes who's spirituallity detemined their class fetures. Nothing since has come close--not even prestige classes.

You may now call me an old fogey. :)

Ditto on all points Thufir makes.

Anyways. As Lyku has generously offered to run a 5th edition D&D Game, this is the 5th edition System Refrence Document.

I think we're getting more technical then desired by new people. Lyku is willing to run a 5E game, Muse has provided the basic materials to play, and Muse and myself are willing to play along side the newbies.

Expand all you want, but you got the information wrong - including the facts.I guess that's why the Charisma stat is the only stat that got more than one paragraph of space, and the only one to have its own table associated ?It's just that the original players were also players of Diplomacy and didn't imagine that anyone might need rules for non-physical/non-magical actions.(Then again, they were also amazed that anyone would need pre-made adventures. I guess they didn't understand well all their customers ).Skills existed in the previous edition already. And there was never a lack of spells and items.Feats are the main new element.

Wizards had bought out TSR before producing THIRD edition! Fourth edition was theirs, too. As is Fifth.TSR sold out to WotC after Second Edition.At least get your dates right.

And D&D is still the most popular game. At some points, Pathfinder might have been close to its sales (no exact data was ever available). But then, arguably, Exalted and the Warhammer 40k RPGs were close, too - but no longer. Though I still prefer Exalted, but that's me.All true, but that was WotC, not TSR.Arguably, all available data points to 5e sales overtaking PF sales again. Paizo's business model wasn't based on sales of their rules, however - they've always relied on selling their Adventure Paths, first and foremost. That's why they offer all the rules for free on the PFSRD site.

So first off, I'll just throw out that when someone tries to provide helpful information you are by all means welcome to disagree and correct, but the snark and condescension aren't necessary.

Charisma had multiple paragraphs and a table, which isn't IMHO a lot to base role playing on and certainly wasn't a large portion of the rule set. Yes, the argument has always been made that you don't need lots of rules to role play, but This relates to the system's support of it.

IIRC, non weapon proficiencies existed, and the name says a lot about the attitude toward them as an afterthought. They were just based on the stats with minor adjustments and limited ability to improve them so they represented a slight refining of the "just roll your stat" mentality but weren't what I would call a developed skill system.

I stand corrected re: WOTC. My understanding is that while core rule book sales for d&d exceed pathfinder (logical as the rule set is available for free), taken as a whole (supplements etc) paizos volume is larger. In any case, hairs being split, 4e marked the decisive end of D&Ds monopoly over the genre, not only with pathfinder but also the growth of many other systems (I had a couple candid conversations with WotC staff during the production of 5e and per them, the lasting legacy of 4e as a monumental business blunder still remains and had significant bearing on the current rule set). Suffice to say that before 2005ish, if you said you played RPGs there was basically no question that you'd played D&d. That is no longer the case.

So let me find out who is interested in playing. This campaign will be focusing on the newer players. I can get a new thread up for it. The materials I provided were the base information.

So let me please get a definite raise of hands of who is interested and mark yourself as new or experienced.

Definitely inexperienced but not new to the setting subject matter. I've read almost everything I could get my hands on from R.A. Salvatore who writes mostly within the Forgotten Realms world of D&D, and I HAVE played a couple of games, but again they never seemed to last long, so my actual experience with the game is severely limited as a result.

So as to not clutter up the post with debate, I'll put some not imediatly relevent items in spoiler text.

On E-BAdger's Statement

E-Badger, I respectfully contest your asertion that everything pre-3rd editon was a combat system. While the skill system was a much better streamlined mechanic for what older editons did with non-weapon proficiciens and theif skills, those things were clearly present in 2nd editon D&D. As a... There's a term for it, but someone who likes thier mechanics to model their character as closely as is reasonable--I honestly consider 3rd edition a step backwards in that it drasticly generalized character abilites. Examples? In second editon your fighter might have been a bastard sword specialsit who was also proficienceint wtih daggers, staves, and all forms fo crossbow. That fighter could aply his genreal combat savvy to any weapon with a good deal of skill, but nowhere near the skil he brought to bear with the weapons he'd specificly trained in.

In Third edition the same fighter was equaly proficient in all simple and martial weapons.

Likewise, your second edition fighter might have been a girl who worked in a coutnry inn growing up. She could know how to cook, how to stable a horse, and---thanks to the local priest of Denir--how to read and write her native languege and the history of her home nation.

The same character in second edtion was a professional barmaid, who was equaly skilled tending and training any animal, equaly aware of her own history and that of the nation on the other side of the planet, and could read adn write every languege she could spea (even if they used diferent alphabets.)

Ultimately, these are minor details, nad I got used to them. Almost 20 yeas later I still find the 3rd edtion presentation of religion and spirtualtiy in the Forgotten REalms vastly inferrior to 2nd editon. Faiths and Avatars, Demihuman Deities, and Powers and Pantheons presetned a beautiful blend of roll playing infomration and priest classes who's spirituallity detemined their class fetures. Nothing since has come close--not even prestige classes.

You may now call me an old fogey. :)

Ditto on all points Thufir makes.

Anyways. As Lyku has generously offered to run a 5th edition D&D Game, this is the 5th edition System Refrence Document.

And I'd be happy to help you with your characters wether or not you acquire the book. (I'd ask you for a concpet that interested you and we could build from there.) :)

As for a character concept, I actually had a wood elf cleric I loved back in the day. I...ahem, might have been obsessed with Firefly at the time, so she might have wound up based around a certain Companion from the show, but she's an old character I've only used once for an actual game. I long ago unfortunately lost her character sheet when 3.5 was still new, so I'd have to put her back together, but any help would be appreciated in doing so.